Barcelona attack

smallStops said:
Look to your own attitude.
One woman died in your "Charlottesville". What were your lot saying :
"was she an innocent bystander?"

Asshole and hypocrite : wants to make us believe he is feeling sorry for the victims in Barcelona,
when he could not even shade a tear for his fellow citizen.

You know what, all of those here, who could not shed a tear for the woman who
died, and now want to make us believe they are shedding "tears of crocodiles":
we don't believe your hypocrisy. :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
More...
What's absolutely astounding is how you can even compare a rioting retard being killed accidentally by a scared low rent White Supremacist....to a disgusting Muslim terrorist running over tourists.
Actually - not surprised. You're a fucking idiot.
 
exGOPer said:
You liked a post by the AAA guy who has been posting from racist sites saying Heather participated in riots without any evidence.

Save me your fake outrage, you guys celebrate dead Americans while asking others to condemn killing of foreigners by terrorists.
More...

Without any evidence? She was killed during a riot she was participating in!
 
exGOPer said:
More lies, she was there to protest Nazis, no evidence she rioted or was killed because of it. So much for your anti-terrorist tough talk.
More...


The legal definition of rioting is two or more people, acting together without authority of law, to willfully do one of the following:

  1. Disturb the public peace
  2. Use force or violence
  3. Threaten to use force or violence, if the threat is accompanied by immediate power of execution.

She was in the street, WILLFULLY, acting without the authority of law and participated in disturbing the public peace. We will never know if she did #2 or 3, but she's definitely guilty of #1 therefore she met the legal definition of rioting.

Checkmate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhl
peilthetraveler said:
The legal definition of rioting is two or more people, acting together without authority of law, to willfully do one of the following:

  1. Disturb the public peace
  2. Use force or violence
  3. Threaten to use force or violence, if the threat is accompanied by immediate power of execution.

She was in the street, WILLFULLY, acting without the authority of law and participated in disturbing the public peace. We will never know if she did #2 or 3, but she's definitely guilty of #1 therefore she met the legal definition of rioting.

Checkmate.
More...

So she was on the street when riots happened that means she rioted? Are you kidding me? Did you miss the part where counter protesters had permits as well or you still believing Trump's lie? So protesting Nazis is disturbing public peace, no wonder you don't call out AAA who posts links from Nazis here. But let's talk about terrorists in Barcelona right with their extreme ideology.

She is guilty because you say so based on complete speculation?

Are you playing chess or parchis for that checkmate?
 
exGOPer said:
So she was on the street when riots happened that means she rioted? Are you kidding me? Did you miss the part where counter protesters had permits as well or you still believing Trump's lie? So protesting Nazis is disturbing public peace, no wonder you don't call out AAA who posts links from Nazis here. But let's talk about terrorists in Barcelona right with their extreme ideology.

She is guilty because you say so based on complete speculation?

Are you playing chess or parchis for that checkmate?
More...


Are you saying that the counter protesters had permits to stand in the middle of the street? The street that hadn't been blocked off by police and that we know of at least 2 other cars that were driving down it trying to get home. They had a permit to be THERE?

Just because you have a permit doesn't give you free reign to walk all over the city in traffic. It's for a specific area and she was not in it.

Checkmate again.
 
LacesOut said:
What's absolutely astounding is how you can even compare a rioting retard being killed accidentally by a scared low rent White Supremacist....to a disgusting Muslim terrorist running over tourists.
Actually - not surprised. You're a fucking idiot.
More...

May be you are the fucking idiot.

How do you want people to believe the sincerity of those when
their own fellow citizen, an American dies and their reaction is " was she an innocent bystander?", "its her own fault", why not "no need to bother" ? Did any of these thought about her family grieving,
or even bother to send any condoleance to the family? Sure no. Because they have ZERO respect
for the death a fellow citizen.

Then now, you want to make us believe that after this attitude, their crocodile tears ( more syntaxically correct than "tears of crocodiles" ) are not just all about posturing ???????

Their mindset is one that accepts, justify, and may be call for people's death.
So they have no business in trying to make people believe that they are really touched by the deaths overseas. That is not what they are after.
 
smallStops said:
May be you are the fucking idiot.

How do you want people to believe the sincerity of those when
their own fellow citizen, an American dies and their reaction is " was she an innocent bystander?", "its her own fault", why not "no need to bother" ? Did any of these thought about her family grieving,
or even bother to send any condoleance to the family? Sure no. Because they have ZERO respect
for the death a fellow citizen.

Then now, you want to make us believe that after this attitude, their crocodile tears ( more syntaxically correct than "tears of crocodiles" ) are not just all about posturing ???????

Their mindset is one that accepts, justify, and may be call for people's death.
So they have no business in trying to make people believe that they are really touched by the deaths overseas. That is not what they are after.
More...
Nonsense. Pure unadulterated bullshit.
 
peilthetraveler said:
The legal definition of rioting is two or more people, acting together without authority of law, to willfully do one of the following:

  1. Disturb the public peace
  2. Use force or violence
  3. Threaten to use force or violence, if the threat is accompanied by immediate power of execution.

She was in the street, WILLFULLY, acting without the authority of law and participated in disturbing the public peace. We will never know if she did #2 or 3, but she's definitely guilty of #1 therefore she met the legal definition of rioting.

Checkmate.
More...
The fuckin guy thinks the people on Las Ramblas are terrorists and the girl run over in Virginia is a hero.
There is no cure for the mental derangement that haunts exgroper or tony schtick
 
exGOPer said:
Why do you think I have love for Muslim conservative right wingers when I haven't for American ones? What special words do you want me to use? Mock their religion like your fellow right wingers?
More...

You have regularly blamed the right-wing in the U.S. for all sorts of terrorist acts, but not once have condemned left-wing or Islamic terrorists for their attacks on innocents.

Let me be very clear - your failure to condemn ALL terrorist attacks makes you complicit in supporting terrorism for particular causes based on your regularly expressed political bias. It only serves to hold up the assertions from other posters that you support attacks from particular groups.

It is time you condemned unconditionally all violent terrorist attacks on innocent people - no matter the politics, race, or religion of the attackers.

For example, I condemn unequivocally the violent alt-right, nazi, KKK, and other right-wing extremists in Charlottesville. I find their actions and words repugnant.

I also condemn the violent ANTIFA extremists in Charlottesville who showed up only with the intent to provoke violence. I do not condemn people who showed up to peacefully counter-protest.

I also regularly condemn those who deliberately damage public and private property during protests.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top